This is the motion which Parliament agreed to, by 397 votes to 223.
“That this House notes that ISIL poses a direct threat to the United Kingdom; welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 2249 which determines that ISIL constitutes an 'unprecedented threat to international peace and security' and calls on states to take 'all necessary measures' to prevent terrorist acts by ISIL and to 'eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria'; further notes the clear legal basis to defend the UK and our allies in accordance with the UN Charter; notes that military action against ISIL is only one component of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria; welcomes the renewed impetus behind the Vienna talks on a ceasefire and political settlement; welcomes the Government's continuing commitment to providing humanitarian support to Syrian refugees; underlines the importance of planning for post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction in Syria; welcomes the Government’s continued determination to cut ISIL’s sources of finance, fighters and weapons; notes the requests from France, the US and regional allies for UK military assistance; acknowledges the importance of seeking to avoid civilian casualties, using the UK’s particular capabilities; notes the Government will not deploy UK troops in ground combat operations; welcomes the Government's commitment to provide quarterly progress reports to the House; and accordingly supports Her Majesty's Government in taking military action, specifically air strikes, exclusively against ISIL in Syria; and offers its wholehearted support to Her Majesty's Armed Forces.”
I listened to the Prime Minister's speech proposing the motion and some other excellent speeches notably from Labour's highly respected former Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, and indeed the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Hilary Benn.
I would like to explain in short why I voted for extending air strikes into Syria.
We were already, and remain, part of an International Coalition engaged in air strikes against ISIL in Iraq - we have now extended those air strikes into Syria which is where Daesh are largely based and from where they operate. The action I supported was not "bombing Syria" - it was about air strikes against ISIL, an evil terrorist organisation which has committed countless atrocities - mainly against Muslims.
The United Nations has called on all member states to take 'all necessary action' against Daesh because it recognises the unprecedented threat that they pose to us all.
France's President has specifically called on Great Britain to join his country in defeating ISIL, following the terrible murders in Paris a few weeks ago.
I am aware that some constituents believe that extending air strikes against ISIL into Syria is in some way the same as the invasion of Iraq in 2003 - something I was opposed to and would not have voted for if I had been an MP. Extending air strikes into Syria is in no way the same as the invasion of Iraq, our intervention in Libya or indeed our long campaign in Afghanistan.
Last Thursday, the Prime Minister explained why we want to extend air strikes and told Parliament how this is one part of a broad strategy to defeat ISIL.
I would ask you please to read the Prime Ministers statement in Hansard on this link.
You can also read the response from the leader of the opposition and the contributions and questions from other MPs. Many of those points have been rehearsed again during the debate and many of the questions have been answered.
Finally, in the last twelve months our counter terrorism forces have thwarted seven planned attacks by ISIL on us. The advice from our security and intelligence services is that we are at serious and very real risk from the sort of attack by ISIL which we witnessed in Paris.
The primary duty of every Government is to keep its people safe and ISIL are a very real and serious threat to us all. In all the circumstances, I believe it is right that Parliament voted to extend air strikes into Syria, to defeat ISIL.